United States v. Richard L. Campbell

1The Honorable John B. Jones, Senior United States District Judge for the
District of South Dakota.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 00-1585
___________
Daniel Hanic, *
*
Appellant, *
*
v. * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
Jeff Bloomberg, Secretary D.O.C.; * District of South Dakota.
Douglas Weber, Warden SDSP; *
John and Jane Doe, Inmate Account * [UNPUBLISHED]
Employees, *
*
Appellees. *
___________
Submitted: October 19, 2000
Filed: October 24, 2000
___________
Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
South Dakota inmate Daniel Hanic appeals the district court’s1 adverse grant of
summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging South Dakota
Department of Corrections Policy No. 1B.10. In addition to raising a procedural
challenge to the application of the policy to him, Hanic claimed that the policy violated

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
substantive due process and his Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures.
Having conducted a de novo review, we reject Hanic’s challenge for the reasons
explained in the district court’s thorough opinion. See Tillman v. Lebanon County
Correctional Facility, 221 F.3d 410, 421-22 (3d Cir. 2000); Parrish v. Mallinger, 133
F.3d 612, 615 (8th Cir. 1998); Mahers v. Halford, 76 F.d 951, 954-56 (8th Cir. 1996),
cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1091 (1997).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-- 2 of 2 --